Newlon v. Teck American Inc. (Formerly Cominco) [05/08/14] 2014 MTWCC 12 Where Respondent alleged that it was relieved of liability because of a superseding intervening cause, but offered no support of that defense, the Court rejected Respondent’s contention. Once Petitioner met his burden of proving a work-related injury with evidence that the injury is the cause of his present disability, the burden to prove an affirmative defense against that claim shifted to the insurer.

Uffalussy
v. St. Patrick Hospital [11/06/07] 2007 MTWCC 45Where
three physicians expressed opinions that Petitioner’s cognitive
impairment was related to her 1997 industrial injury based on their
opinions that Petitioner’s head injuries, depression, and chronic
pain contributed to the collective cause of her cognitive impairment,
the burden of proof shifted to Respondent. Although Petitioner reported
to emergency room personnel that she “thinks” she hit the
back of her head at the time of the MVA, she reported no loss of consciousness,
no bumps or lacerations on her head were observed, and the physical
examination of Petitioner’s head revealed it to be “normocephalic,
atraumatic.” Therefore, Respondent failed to meet its burden of
proof.

Uffalussy
v. St. Patrick Hospital [11/06/07] 2007 MTWCC 45 “Once
the claimant has proven a work-related injury and produced evidence
that that injury is a cause of a present disability, an insurer who
alleges that subsequent events are the actual cause of the claimant’s
current disability has the burden of proving that allegation, which
is in the nature of an affirmative defense, by a preponderance of the
evidence.” Briney v. Pacific Employers Ins. Co., 283
Mont. 346, 351, 942 P.2d 81, 84 (1997), citing Walker v. United
Parcel Serv., 262 Mont. 450, 456, 865 P.2d 1113, 1117 (1993).